Features
The features were all brilliant in their own right. Although they were all features by definition they had many differences in terms of approach, strategies and types of investigation required.
The story of Ramona Moore was set up in a hard news style. It was feature length but the writing was very concise. The description of Ramona was at the beginning of the article, this was a tactic by the writer so the reader would learn about the type of person she was. The writer wanted the reader to form some sort of attachment to Ramona to induce more of an emotive response to the hideous way she was tortured and murdered. The writer also does this to almost put you in the place of Ramona’s mother Elle. We as readers are encouraged to imagine the desperation and helplessness we would feel knowing our child is in danger but nothing was been done by those who are supposed be fair, unbiased and protect civilians.
It made me think what it would be like to be discriminated based on my race and how I would feel if authorities did not care if one of my loved ones was in danger. Clearly one-sided the article doesn’t portray the NYPD in a positive light – and rightfully so. The reader can’t really draw any other conclusion other than this was a racially biased way to deal with the case, and it cost Ramona her life. The comparisons between the search for Ramona (or lack of) with Arnov’s dog is a powerful way to get this point across.
The investigation done for this article would have mainly been interviews with Elle and her lawyer. It also appears the writer attended the trial to gather further information on the details of Ramona’s kidnapping and death. Research also would have been done regarding missing person’s complaints.
Pearls Before Breakfast was entirely different. It was long and very descriptive. The writer wanted to give the reader every opportunity to imagine what it would be like to be there at the station in rush hour, witnessing all this. The introduction revealed little information and this encourages the reader to continue reading to find out what the piece is all about. It is very much a softer style of news.
The interviews with passers by after the sociological experiment only added to the strength of the story. It gave insight into why people watched and why people continued on – almost in their own little bubble. It also made me as a reader question – Would I stop? Shamefully I don’t think I would. I think this article causes the reader to question their morals and what they value in life. Are we all so busy that we would neglect to take in something beautiful? Surely we are not so pressed for time that we can’t stop for a minute? Getting Joshua Bell’s perspective on how the experience changed him was also another great way to engage the reader further. It was a very thought provoking piece.
The investigation undertaken for this article would have been demographical research on those that use the L’enfant Plaza Station. There were Interviews with passers by. These people would have been selected by watching their reaction and behaviours towards Joshua. Lastly, Joshua gave an account of his experience..
We still have not lived long enough was different again. It used the currency of the Black Saturday bushfires to take the reader through history to ask the question – have we really learnt anything from the past? It was an informative piece written by Tom Griffiths, an academic with a strong body of knowledge on environmental history. The authors qualifications alone instil a sense of trust in what is written as it come from an authority on the topic. Griffiths draws similarities between 1939’s Black Friday and the 2009 Bushfires. He suggests fire plans are not viable on their own and people need to understand ‘local history and ecological distinctiveness’.
This concept is entirely new and causes the reader to look at the situation in a totally new light. Just as we have our own history and biology so does our environment – in particular trees. The reader is made aware that by studying patterns from the past we can identify future threats.
In all our advancements over the years – we can’t control nature. This article sends a strong message; instead of trying to conquer everything in our path that poses a threat to us – we could simply try to understand it and this might work in our favour. It is a very clever way of Griffiths to use the currency of the fires to introduce this biological concept to readers, as they would be looking for answers as to why this tragedy occurred. It also exposes society’s often reactive and ignorant thinking.
Griffiths used his own body of knowledge as well as historical data to research for this article. He also obtained data from the Bureau of Meteorology and international fire historian Stephen Pyne had a significant contribution to the piece.
